rdfrocha 0 Posted January 16, 2018 Share Posted January 16, 2018 ESET Remote Administrator (Server), Version 6.5 (6.5.417.0) Endpoint deployment via Operating System Software Install task fails on new Windows 10 clients. So, Version 1709 of Windows 10 is in the wild for a while, and one thing that has changed is that SMBv1 is disabled by default. This causes ERA to fail mounting the ADMIN$ share on these clients while trying to run a software install or update. Solution is to edit line 134 in /var/opt/eset/RemoteAdministrator/Server/Scripts/UnixWindowsNetworkRemoteInstall.sh and change it to LANG= mount -t cifs -o "$(mount_domain_option)username=$ERA_RD_WN_USERNAME",vers=3.0 "$remote_cifs_share" "$local_cifs_mount" to force the cifs mount operation to use SMBv3. Will this change be reverted by a future update of the ERA Server? Any chance ESET may rewrite the script to at least try multiple versions of SMB before failing the task? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ESET Staff MartinK 383 Posted January 16, 2018 ESET Staff Share Posted January 16, 2018 1 hour ago, rdfrocha said: Will this change be reverted by a future update of the ERA Server? Yes, both update and repair will replace this file with version available in installer. 1 hour ago, rdfrocha said: Any chance ESET may rewrite the script to at least try multiple versions of SMB before failing the task? Fix for this issue is prepared for upcoming major release. Technically it is almost the same as your modification, except that even more variants are tested (multiple versions and authentication methods) so that as much as possible environments is covered by it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rdfrocha 0 Posted January 16, 2018 Author Share Posted January 16, 2018 9 minutes ago, MartinK said: Fix for this issue is prepared for upcoming major release. Technically it is almost the same as your modification, except that even more variants are tested (multiple versions and authentication methods) so that as much as possible environments is covered by it. A loop until error=0 testing other scenarios was my next step if a fix wasn't planned yet. I'll just wait for it instead of messing with the code. Thank you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts